That last review, while very favorable, left a lot to be desired. The reviewer kept talking about the sharpness level from F5 .6 to F11, completely neglecting the fact that most people who use this lens will rarely use it at those apertures. He also concluded, "that the Tamron offering in this case was more expensive than either the Canon or Nikon equivalents." I don't believe that this is true in any of the markets that the lenses are offered in, and definitely not in the North American market. He didn't mention the shortened focal length that Roger observed. I didn't find any of the image samples that he offered really gave any kind of true picture of the capability of the lens.

I am looking forward to a review from someone like Bryan Carnethan. I'm also looking forward to a head-to-head comparison between the new Tamron and either the Canon or Nikon equivalents.

This review wasn't as enthusiastic about the image quality, comparing it more to the Sigma than the Canon or Nikon equivalents. My enthusiasm for this lens is cooling a bit. I am skeptical that the lens quality is only on the Sigma level, though, when previous reviews have placed image quality on par or slightly better than the Canon. At the moment I would lean towards the Canon

I always enjoy Matt Granger, and this review is certainly favorable. It seems to me that the Tamron would represent a very strong value/competition at about the $1200 range (which is where I think it will end up selling for in the North American market long term). I would consider it at that price.